Paradigms IN Geography PDF

Preview

Summary

Paradigms in Geography ...

Description

CBCS B.A.(Hons.) Geography III year VI Semester (January-May, 2020) Core Paper – Evolution of Geographical Thought Assignment Topic: Paradigms in Geography

Submitted by: SHREYA CHOUDHURY College Roll No - 31718708 Exam Roll No - 17036513062

Submitted to - Prof. Khusro Moin

Department of Geography Kirori Mal College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007.

WHAT ARE PARADIGMS?

In science and philosophy, a paradigm is a distinct set of concepts or thought patterns, including theories, research methods, postulates, and standards for what constitutes legitimate contributions to a field. Or A framework of concepts, results, and procedures within which subsequent work is structured. Normal science proceeds within such a framework or paradigm. A paradigm does not impose a rigid or mechanical approach but can be taken more or less creatively and flexibly. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a paradigm as "a pattern or model, an exemplar; a typical instance of something, an example" Thomas Samuel Kuhn (1922–1996) was one of the most influential philosophers of science of the twentieth century. His 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is one of the most cited academic books of all time. Kuhn’s contribution to the philosophy of science marked not only a break with several key positivist doctrines, but also inaugurated a new style of philosophy of science that brought it closer to the history of science. Kuhn in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) focuses upon one specific component of the disciplinary matrix. This is the consensus on exemplary instances of scientific research, these exemplars of good science are what Kuhn refers to when he uses the term ‘paradigm’ in a narrower sense. He described it as the “the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques, and so on shared by the members of a given community”. It said that paradigms are the broadest area of consensus in a discipline that defines the subareas of research. As represented by Hagget these are ‘supermodels’ of a discipline that provide best methods of investigation.

Kuhn uses this concept in 21 different ways which were collapsed into 3 main paradigm types by Masterman. They are –

METAPHYSICAL/ METAPARADIGMS SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGM

ARTEFACT/ CONSTRUCT PARADIGM

 META-PARADIGMS - They present a total global view of science  SOCIOLOGICAL PARADIGMS – it is grounded on concrete scientific achievement, a universally recognised achievement.



CONSTRUCT PARADIGMS – specific entities such as a textbook, an instrument are viewed as paradigms.

These paradigms were interrelated by Masterman and subsumed each other as Construct paradigm subsumed by Sociological paradigm which in turn was subsumed by Meta paradigm which was defined as the broadest sense of consensus in discipline.

Masterman distinguished relevant state of affairs after Kuhn’s earlier formulation on single or multiple paradigms were unclear which he termed as –

 Non-paradigm science- A discipline is in a non-paradigmatic state when there are no paradigms and the scientists in a particular discipline cannot differentiate the subject matter of their discipline from that of other allied disciplines.

 Dual paradigmatic science - A dual-paradigmatic science exists just prior to a revolution which leads to the emergence of a single paradigm. During this period, the two paradigms compete for control.

 Multiple paradigm science - In a multiple-paradigm science, many paradigms are competing for hegemony in the field.

In a series of stages, a discipline moves from the nonparadigmatic state through the competitive dual-paradigmatic stage to the single-paradigm stage. This evolutionary framework is disrupted by the possibility that certain disciplines, especially in the social sciences, may be multipleparadigm sciences. However, these multiple paradigms can coexist together as has been contended by many scientists and is the main criticism of Masterman’s multi-paradigmatic view.

Kuhn said that accumulation of knowledge alone cannot cause changes in science, but the changes are observed through a revolution.

The change in this process follows a linkage of events –

PARADIGM A NORMAL SCIENCE ANOMALIES CRISIS REVOLUTION PARADIGM B

Briefly, after a paradigm has emerged, there is generally a period of “Normal Science” when scientists working within that paradigm accumulate knowledge. This research expansion results in the gradual accumulation of “anomalies” which cannot be explained or solved by the existing paradigm. As these increases, a “Crisis Stage” is reached as discontent with the paradigm mounts. Ultimately, this results in a “Revolution”. However, as David Harvey pointed out the revolutionary process stressed by Kuhn only gains acceptance if ‘the nature of the social relationships embodied in the theory are actualized in the real world’.

PARADIGMS IN GEOGRAPHICAL THOUGHT

Geography had to confront many evolutionary and methodological problems. Many scholars have assumed it to be paradigmatic science. It passed from the descriptive and teleological phase to the quantitative, radical and dialectical materialism stage. Some have argued that geography as a discipline has undergone the metamorphosis. The revolution that signals the demise of one paradigm and the creation of another. Various methodologies have been adopted to give precise and reliable description of places in literary as well as mathematical languages. It is only when we abandon the revolutionary change concept of Kuhn that we are able to trace the development of geography from a dual paradigmatic discipline to a single paradigmatic scale – from the coexistence of determinism and possibilism followed by the cohabitation of the chorological paradigm and regional school paradigm and then in 1960’s the

development of spatial paradigm (prior to determinism geography was in preparadigm phase). However, a characteristic feature of paradigms in geography is that while the new paradigms developed the older ones still existed at a lower frequency but were not completely declared obsolete. But a central focus to the formation of a paradigm is the existence of exemplar or exemplars. The image of the subject matter is the single overriding theme that is most characteristic of the dominant exemplar; it is the basic subject matter of that viewpoint. In addition to exemplar and image of the subject matter, a paradigm must also include a constellation of theories and methods.

Below are some of the geographic exemplars

EXEMPLAR Anthropogeographie

SUBJECT MATTER inorganic control - organic response

THEORIES AND LAWS RATZEL METHODS 1) Darwinism (stages of 1) Deductive approach theories of physical and social 2) Newtonian cause and effect systems) 3) Systematic approack 2) Environmental determinism

EXEMPLAR tableau de geographie de la France

SUBJECT MATTER changes in attitudes values and habits create possibilities for human communities.

VIDAL DE LA

METHODS THEORIES AND LAWS BLACHE 1) field work/case studies Genres de vie: the product and 2) emphasis on causal successions reflections of the interrelation or sequences between men and his environment.

EXEMPLAR SUBJECT MATTER 1) 4 papers from 1919- 1922 1) time the fourth dimension in 2) Morphology of landscape geography 3) Agricultural origins and dispersals 2) landscape view of geography CARL METHODS 4) The early Spanish main THEORIES AND LAWS SAUER 1) field work and historical 1 ) cultural landscapes evolve reconstruction of the human landscape from the physical landscape 2) inductive development of 2) man as an agent of environment modification landscape patterns

EXEMPLAR 1) nature of the geography 2)perspective on the nature geography

SUBJECT MATTER 1) Chorology 2) Perceived as idiographic

HARTSHON E THEORIES AND LAWS 1) functional relationship 2) order-classifications

EXEMPLAR exceptionalism in geography

METHODS 1) field work 2) mapping

SUBJECT MATTER 1) spatial interaction 2) spatial organization 3) nomothetic appeal

SCHAEFE R THEORIES AND LAWS 1) location 2) flows 3) distribution 4) settlement

METHODS 1) mathematics statistical methods 2) scientific methods

Geography was marked by Pre-Paradigm Phase till the late 19th century as there was no dominant school of thought with various schools competing for dominance that were built around individual scientists. Example – Humboldt’s deterministic view along with empirical view was criticised by Oscar Peschel who stressed on geography as a science and restricted its scope to physical geography. Besides this there

were various other schools of thoughts like – regional school of Ritter and his teleological approach, philosophical approach of Kant towards Geography etc. According to Kuhn the preparadigm phase in geography is said to have been existed till Darwin (roughly till 1880’s).

The pre-paradigm phase was followed by Professionalism in geography that was marked by the development of discipline into a casual explanatory one with the coming of chairs in various universities and setting/drawing up the course to be studied under the discipline.

DETERMINISM (DETERMINISTIC SCHOOL OF THOUGHT)

The essence of the Deterministic school of thought is that the history, culture, living style, and stage of development of a social group or nation are exclusively or largely governed by the physical factors of environment. The Determinists generally consider man as a passive agent. The first attempt to explain the physical features and character traits of various people and their culture with reference to the influence of natural conditions was made by the Greeks and the Roman schools. Geographical determinism was dominated by Arab Geographers. The founder of New Determinism i.e. Environmental Determinism was Friedrich Ratzel in his book – “Anthropogeographie-Volume I” (1882) which

was essentially a book that was organised ‘largely in terms of the natural conditions of the earth, which he studied in their relations to human culture’ and represented an environment-dominated-man-response approach. He supplemented the Classical Geographical Determinism with elements of Social Darwinism and developed a theory of the state as an organism. He was convinced that the course of history, the mode of life of the people and the stage of development are closely influenced by the physical features and location of a place in relation to mountains and plains. He gave more weight age to location in relation to topographic features. Subsequent geographers like Mackinder, Chisholm, Davies, Bowman, Robert Mill, Geddes, Sauer, Herbertson, Taylor, etc., interpreted the progress of societies with a deterministic approach as well. However, Ratzel reversed this approach in the 2nd volume, but this was extended further especially in United States by scholars such as Huntington, Semple, Davis etc.

1.

W.M. Davis – According to him geography was concerned with the analyses of the relationships between inorganic control and organic response. Based over the Darwinian concept of evolution he developed the cycle of erosion of landforms. He tried to establish cause and effect relationships and generalisations which was one of the basic themes of determinism.

2. Ellsworth Huntington – He made the most decisive step towards something new and conclusive in the environment causation thinking. He stated that the supreme achievements of civilisation in any region-were always bound with a particular type of climate, and variations in climate led to pulsations in the history of culture. His book Civilisation and Climate (1915) where he concluded that civilisation flourish in

stimulating climate. Also, in Pulse of Asia (1907) he correlated the invasion by Central Asian people with the periodic drying of pastures. He associated with the climatic cycles, the Golden Age in ancient Greece, the Renaissance in Europe and cyclical fluctuations in iron production or the price of shares. He was of the opinion that weather and climate influenced the trends in the human history.

3. E.C. Semple – To her man, like other organisms was the product of earth as she remarked, “Man is the product of the earth's surface. This means not merely that he is a child of the earth, dust of her dust; but that the earth has mothered him, fed him, set him to task, directed his thoughts, confronted him with difficulties that have strengthened his body and sharpened his wits, given him problems of navigation or irrigation and at the same time whispered hints to solution.” She also wrote a book Influences of Geographical Environment (1911) where she examined the physical factors that control the development of civilisations. POSSIBILISM (POSSIBILISTIC SCHOOL OF THOUGHT)

Possibilism in geography developed as a reaction to extreme generalizations of environmental determinists that led to a counter thesis, of possibilism, which presented the man as an active rather than a passive agent. Vidal stated that the differences between groups in the same or similar environments are not due to the dictates of physical environment but due to variations in attitudes, values and habits. These variations in human attitudes and habits create numerous possibilities for the human communities. Inspired by the Volume II of Anthropogeographie of Ratzel, Vidal de la Blache led down the possibilist approach in his book Tableau de la Geographie de la France (1903). Central to the works of

Blache was the idea of genre de vie (lifestyles) that have developed in different geographic environments. Blache’s idea were developed in his later works of La France de Vest (Paris, 1917), and in his Principles de Geographie Humaine (1922). There are no necessities, but everywhere there are possibilities. The range of possibilities in every region depends more on the level of technological development of man and less on the dictates of environment. He specifically emphasised on the idea of natural milieu which assessed the ‘inorganically integrated and biotic infrastructure of human life on earth’ and connected it with the idea of genre de vie using milieux de vie which is the adaption of the natural resources off the social environment by different people. This Vidalian tradition established by Blache was essentially forwarded by his disciples in France mainly. The important scholars of possibilism include Jean Brunhes, Emmanuel de Martonne, Camille Vallaux, H.H. Barrows etc.

1.

Jean Brunhes - Brunhes enunciated the first explicit formulation of human geography as a systematic approach to the study of human geography. She also tried to blend the idea of genre de vie and kulturlandschaft of Schluter to give a dynamic outlook to geography.

2.

Emmanuel de Martonne – He manifested the Vidalian tradition in his study of physical geography and this was seen in his study of Coastal Morphology in Brittany. His regional interest in Europe all through is life was a manifestation of possibilist trend in geography.

3. H.H. Barrows – He was the prominent ecologist—gave greater

importance to man than to environment. He went to quote that the adjustments in the human lives were a matter of choice rather than being caused by physical environment. (This he termed as Human Ecology). 4. Febvre - The historian Lucien Febvre (1878-1956) set out to demolish the environmental deterministic argument by asserting the mobility of man as against the passivity of the environment, and regarded other humans as part of environment, of any group because they contributed to the formation of the next group’s cultural surroundings, or milieu. Among those influenced by this type of thinking was H.J. Fleure (1877-1969) who tried to formulate world regions based on human characteristic rather than the traditional climatic—biotic regions.

LANDSCAPE P PARADIGM ARADIGM

This paradigm developed after the World War-I. In 1925, Carl Sauer published The Morphology of Landscape. In this work, he sought to demonstrate that nature does not create culture, but instead, culture working with and on nature, creates ways-of-life. He considered human impacts on the landscape to be a manifestation of culture. Therefore, he argued, in order to understand a culture, a geographer must learn to read the landscape.

Carl Sauer rejected areal differentiation, asserting that the geographer’s role is to investigate and understand the nature of the transition from the natural to the cultural landscape, and the successive stages through which the cultural landscape has passed during its transformation. From such an exercise the geographer would identify the major changes that have occurred in an area as a result of occupancy by a succession of human groups. He went on to develop a historical framework for the study of landscape development with a focus on the patterns of human occupancy rather than on the socio-cultural agencies that generate the patterns.

Sauer was influenced by Otto Schluter and Siegfried Passarge. Schluter propounded that the reconstruction of the original landscape (Urlandschaft) was important for the study of landscape on historical scale where the landscape was transformed by the man (Kulturlandschaft).

REGION REGIONAL AL P PARADIGM ARADIGM

This approach prevailed during the second half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, a period when then regional geography paradigm was central within the geographical sciences. This paradigm was essentially concerned with areal differentiation where geography was explained by Hartshorne as – “An accurate, orderly and rationale description of variable character of earth’s surface”. This paradigm was essentially a synthesis and commentary on a viewpoint that was developing in Germany and USA

Attention is paid to unique characteristics of a particular region such as natural elements, human elements, and regionalization which covers the techniques of delineating space into regions. Rooted in the tradition of the German-speaking countries, the two pillars of regional geography are the idiographic study of Länder or spatial individuals (specific places, countries, continents) and the typological study of Landschaften or spatial types (landscapes such as coastal regions, mountain regions, border regions, etc.).

Regional Paradigm was specifically associated with the chorological view of Ricthofen and Hettner. Chorology as an approach to the study of geography was first developed by Hettner in his book Geographische Zeitschrift. However, Hartshorne was the one who in his book Nature of Geography (1961) codified this chorological view into one that of areal differentiation. Hartshorne as pointed out by Taafe used the term, areal differentiation to characterise the way in which geographers dealt with the wide variety of phenomena physical, economic, and social, which exist together in area and distinguish them from other areas This paradigm specifically recognised the studies based on topical specialism of regions in physical and human aspects.

SP SPA ATIAL P PARADIGM ARADIGM

This is the only true paradigm in geography if we take into consideration the Kuhnian concept of revolutionary chance that is essential for a paradigmatic shift. The development of this paradigm was necessitated as result of the growing frustration for the increasing descriptive or idiographic character of geography in the wake of the Regional paradigm. This paradigm was talked about by F.K.Schaefer in his article Exceptionalism in Geography (1953) which emphasized the need greater use of scientific means specifically

mathematics and statis...